Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T13:48:29.716Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

19 - A Model of Moderated Convergence between Explicit Dispositions, Implicit Dispositions, and Behavior

from Section IV - Improving Measurement and Theorizing About Implicit Bias

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 December 2024

By
Manfred Schmitt ,
Wilhelm Hofmann ,
Tobias Gschwendner ,
Friederike Gerstenberg  and
Axel Zinkernagel
Edited by
Jon A. Krosnick ,
Tobias H. Stark  and
Amanda L. Scott
Jon A. Krosnick
Affiliation:
Stanford University, California
Tobias H. Stark
Affiliation:
Utrecht University, The Netherlands
Amanda L. Scott
Affiliation:
The Strategy Team, Columbus, Ohio
Get access

Summary

On the basis of dual-process theories, we propose a model that accounts for the (lack of) convergence between explicit and implicit dispositions, the effects of explicit and implicit dispositions on controlled and automatic behavior, and changes in explicit dispositions that are based on self-observed automatic behavior. The model is characterized by nine direct effects among the constructs and measures that are included the model. Importantly, in this model, each effect can be moderated by characteristics of persons, situations, and person x situation interactions. As a general theoretical framework, the model can be applied to a variety of individual difference constructs such as personality traits, values, norms, attitudes, prejudice, beliefs, stereotypes, judgment bias, and discrimination. We present evidence from our research and from studies by other researchers that speaks to the validity and usefulness of the model. We propose that implicit–explicit consistency should be considered a variable in itself and demonstrate its usefulness for understanding some findings that have been reported in the self-concept and self-esteem literatures. We make suggestions for future research with an emphasis on the discrimination of automatic and controlled behavior using facial expressions of emotion as an example.

Keywords

implicit dispositionsexplicit dispositionsmoderator variablesindirect measuresdirect measuresdual process theoriesautomatic behaviorcontrolled behaviorReflective-Impulsive-Model (RIM)facial expressions of emotion
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Implicit Bias and Racism , pp. 517 - 540
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2025

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ajzen, I. T. (1987). Attitudes, traits, and actions: Dispositional prediction of behavior in personality and social psychology. In Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (vol. 20, pp. 1–63). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ajzen, I. T., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 888–918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arcuri, L., & Boca, S. (1996). Pregiudizio eaffi liazione politica: Destra e sinistra di fronte all’immigrazione dal terzo mondo [Prejudice and political affiliation: Right- and left-wing attitudes toward immigration from the third world]. In Legrenzi, P., & Girotto, V. (Eds.), Psicologia e politica [Psychology and politics]. Milano: Cortina, pp. 214–274.Google Scholar
Asendorpf, J. B., Banse, R., & Mücke, D. (2002). Double dissociation between implicit and explicit personality self-concept: The case of shy behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(2), 380–393.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 248–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banse, R. & Gawronski, B. (2003). Die Skala Motivation zu vorurteilsfreiem Verhalten: Psychometrische Eigenschaften und Validität. Diagnostica, 49(1), 4–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bar-Anan, Y., & Nosek, B. A. (2014). A comparative investigation of seven indirect attitude measures. Behavior Research Methods, 46, 668–688.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baumeister, R. F., & Tice, D. M. (1988). Metatraits. Journal of Personality, 56, 571–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumert, A., Buchholz, N., Zinkernagel, A., et al. (2019). Causal underpinnings of working memory and Stroop interference control: Testing the effects of anodal and cathodal tDCS over the left DLPFC. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience (online). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-019-00726-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bem, D. J. (1972). Self-perception theory. In Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (vol. VI, pp. 1–62). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bem, D. J., & Allen, A. (1974). On predicting some of the people some of the time: The search for cross‑situational consistency in behavior. Psychological Review, 81, 506–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Betsch, C. (2004). Präferenz für Intuition und Deliberation (PID): Inventar zur Erfassung von affekt- und kognitionsbasiertem Entscheiden [Preference for intuition and deliberation (PID): An inventory for assessing affect- and cognition-based decision-making]. Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 25, 179–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blair, I. V. (2002). The malleability of automatic stereotypes and prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6(3), 242–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blair, I. V., Ma, J. E., & Lenton, A. P. (2001). Imagining stereotypes away: The moderation of implicit stereotypes through mental imagery. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 828–841.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blais, A. R., & Weber, E. U. (2001). A domain-specific risk taking (DOSPERT) scale for adult populations. Judgement and Decision Making, 1, 33–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brand, M., Fujiwara, E., Borsutzky, S., et al. (2005). Decision-making deficits of Korsakoff patients in a new gambling task with explicit rules: Associations with executive functions. Neuropsychology, 19, 267–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, C. D., Brown-Iannuzzi, J. L., & Payne, B. K. (2012). Sequential priming measures of implicit social cognition: A meta-analysis of associations with behavior and explicit attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16, 330–350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Castelli, L., De Dea, C., & Nesdale, D. (2008). Learning social attitudes: Children’s sensitivity to the nonverbal behavior of adult models during interracial interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 1504–1513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1957). Personality and Motivation Structure and Measurement. New York, NY: World Book.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B., & Warburton, F. W. (1967). Objective Personality and Motivation Tests: A Theoretical Introduction and Practical Compendium. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Chaplin, W. F. (1991). The next generation of moderator research in personality psychology. Journal of Personality, 59, 143–178.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Conrey, F. R., Sherman, J. W., Gawronski, B., et al. (2005). Separating multiple processes in implicit social cognition: The quad model of implicit task performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 469–487.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Cuyper, K., De Houwer, J., Vansteelandt, K., et al. (2017). Using indirect measurement tasks to assess the self-concept of personality: A systematic review and meta-analyses. European Journal of Personality, 31, 8–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Houwer, J. (2018). Propositional models of evaluative conditioning. Social Psychological Bulletin, 13, Article e28046. https://doi.org/10.5964/spb.v13i3.28046.Google Scholar
Dislich, F. X. R., Imhoff, R., Banse, R., et al. (2012). Discrepancies between implicit and explicit self-concepts of intelligence predict performance on tests of intelligence. European Journal of Personality, 26, 212–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dislich, F. X. R., Zinkernagel, A., Ortner, T.M., et al. (2010). Convergence of direct, indirect, and objective risk-taking measures in gambling: The moderating role of impulsiveness and self-control. Journal of Psychology, 218, 20–27.Google Scholar
Dunton, B. C., & Fazio, R. H. (1997). An individual difference measure of motivation to control prejudiced reactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 316–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egloff, B., & Schmukle, S. C. (2002). Predictive validity of an implicit association test for assessing anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1441–1455.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eid, M., & Diener, E. (Eds.) (2006). Handbook of Multimethod Measurement in Psychology. New York, NY: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ekman, P. (1992). Are there basic emotions? Psychological Review, 99, 550–553.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Epstein, S., Pacini, R., Denes-Raj, V., et al. (1996). Individual differences in intuitive-experiential and analytical-rational thinking styles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 390–405.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Evans, J. S. B. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255–278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Evans, J. S. B., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013). Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 223–241.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fenigstein, A. (2009). Private and public self-consciousness. In Leary, M. R., & Hoyle, R. H. (Eds.), Handbook of Individual Differences in Social Behavior. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Fenigstein, A., Scheier, M. F., & Buss, A. H. (1975). Public and private self-consciousness: Assessment and theory. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 522–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Filipp, S. H., & Freudenberg, E. (1989). Der Fragebogen zur Erfassung dispositioneller Selbstaufmerksamkeit (SAM-Fragebogen) [A Scale for assessing dispositional self-consciousness (SAM-Scale)]. Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
Fridlund, A. J., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Guidelines for human electromyographic research. Psychophysiology, 23, 567–589.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friese, M., Hofmann, W., & Schmitt, M. (2009). When and why do implicit measures predict behavior? Empirical evidence for the moderating role of opportunity, motivation, and process reliance. European Review of Social Psychology, 19, 285–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friesen, W., & Ekman, P. (1983). EMFACS-7: Emotional Facial Action Coding System. University of California (unpublished manual).Google Scholar
Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 692–731.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gawronski, B., & Creighton, L. A. (2013). Dual-process theories. In D. E. Carlston (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Social Cognition. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 282–312.Google Scholar
Gerstenberg, F. X. R., Imhoff, R., Banse, R., et al. (2013). How implicit-explicit consistency of the intelligence self-concept moderates reactions to performance feedback. European Journal of Personality, 27, 238–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerstenberg, F. X. R., Imhoff, R., & Schmitt, M. (2012). “Women are bad at math, but I’m not, am I?” Fragile mathematical self-concept predicts vulnerability to a stereotype threat effect on mathematical performance. European Journal of Personality, 26, 212–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102, 4–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (2017). The implicit revolution: Reconceiving the relation between conscious and unconscious. American Psychologist, 72, 861–871.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenwald, A. G., Poehlman, T. A., Uhlmann, E. L., et al. (2009). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 17–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gschwendner, T., Hofmann, W., & Schmitt, M. (2006a). Moderatoren der Konsistenz implizit und explizit erfasster Einstellungen und Persönlichkeitsmerkmale. [Moderators of the consistency of implicitly and explicitly assessed attitudes and personality traits]. Psychologische Rundschau, 57, 13–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gschwendner, T., Hofmann, W., & Schmitt, M. (2006b). Ein Modell des Zusammenhangs impliziter Reaktionszeitverfahren mit Fragebogenmaßen [A model of convergence between implict reaction time procedures and questionnaires]. In Proyer, R. T., Ortner, T. M., & Kubinger, K. D. (Eds.), Theorie und Praxis Objektiver Persönlichkeitstests [Theory and application of objective personality tests]. Bern: Verlag Hans Huber, pp. 69–86.Google Scholar
Gschwendner, T., Hofmann, W., & Schmitt, M. (2006c). Synergistic moderator effects of situation and person factors of awareness and adjustment on the consistency of implicit and explicit attitudes. Journal of Individual Differences, 27, 47–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gschwendner, T., Hofmann, W., & Schmitt, M. (2008a). Differential stability: The effects of acute and chronic construct accessibility on the temporal stability of the Implicit Association Test. Journal of Individual Differences, 29, 70–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gschwendner, T., Hofmann, W., & Schmitt, M. (2008b). Convergent and predictive validity of implicit and explicit anxiety measures as a function of specificity similarity and content similarity. European Journal of Psychological Assessment. 24, 254–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hahn, A., & Gawronski, B. (2019). Facing one’s implicit biases: From awareness to acknowledgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116(5), 769–794.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hahn, A., Judd, C. M., Hirsh, H. K., et al. (2014). Awareness of implicit attitudes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 1369–1392.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hänze, M. (2002). Bedürfnis nach Struktur und Furcht vor Festlegung: Psychometrische Analysen einer deutschsprachigen Skala zur Erfassung der Konstrukte “Personal Need for Structure,” “Personal Fear of Invalidity,” und “Need for Closure.” Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 23, 327–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartshorne, H., & May, M. A. (Eds.). (1928). Studies in the Nature of Character (Vol. I: Studies in Deceit). New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hefter, R., Manoach, D., & Barton, J. (2005). Perception of facial expression and facial identity in subjects with social developmental disorders. Neurology, 65, 1620–1625.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hofmann, W., Gawronski, B., Gschwendner, et al. (2005). A meta-analysis on the correlation between the Implicit Association Test and explicit self-report measures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1369–1385.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hofmann, W., Gschwendner, T., Castelli, L., et al. (2008a). Implicit and explicit attitudes and interracial interaction: The moderating role of situationally available control resources. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 11, 69–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofmann, W., Gschwendner, T., Nosek, B. A., et al. (2005). What moderates implicit-explicit consistency? European Review of Social Psychology, 16, 335–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofmann, W., Gschwendner, T., & Schmitt, M. (2005). On implicit-explicit consistency: The moderating role of individual differences in awareness and adjustment. European Journal of Personality, 19, 25–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofmann, W., Gschwendner, T., & Schmitt, M. (2009). The road to the unconscious self not taken: Discrepancies between self- and observer-inferences about implicit dispositions from nonverbal behavioral cues. European Journal of Personality, 23, 243–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofmann, W., Gschwendner, T., Wiers, R., et al. (2008b). Working memory capacity and self-regulatory behavior: Toward an individual differences perspective on behavior determination by automatic versus controlled processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 962–977.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hofmann, W., Rauch, W., & Gawronski, B. (2007). And deplete us not into temptation: Automatic attitudes, dietary restraint, and self-regulatory resources as determinants of eating behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 497–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofmann, W., Schmeichel, B. J., & Baddeley, A. D. (2012). Executive functions and self-regulation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16, 174–180.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, J. G., Wilke, A., & Weber, E. U. (2004). A domain specific scale measuring risk perceptions, expected benefits, and perceived-risk attitude in German-speaking populations. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 35, 153–163.Google Scholar
Kammer, D., & Nowack, W. (1983). Self-Monitoring: Construction and Validation of a German Two Factor Scale (Bielefelder Arbeiten zur Sozialpsychologie, Nr. 104). Bielefeld: University of Bielefeld, Germany.Google Scholar
Kenrick, D. T., & Funder, D. C. (1988). Profiting from controversy: Lessons from the person-situation debate. American Psychologist, 43, 23–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keren, G., & Schul, Y. (2009). Two is not always better than one: A critical evaluation of two-system theories. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 533–550.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klauer, K. C., Voss, A., Schmitz, F., et al. (2007). Process components of the Implicit Association Test: A diffusion-model analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 353–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Köllner, M. G., & Schultheiss, O. C. (2014). Meta-analytic evidence of low convergence between implicit and explicit measures of the needs for achievement, affiliation, and power. Frontiers in Psychology (online), 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00826Google ScholarPubMed
Korb, S., & Sander, D. (2009). Facial expression (neural architecture of). In Sander, D., & Scherer, K. R. (Eds.), The Oxford Companion to Emotion and the Affective Sciences. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 173–175.Google Scholar
Krizan, Z., & Suls, J. (2008). Are implicit and explicit measures of self-esteem related? A meta-analysis for the name-letter test. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 521–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurdi, B., Seitchik, A. E., Axt, J. R., et al. (2019). Relationship between the implicit association test and intergroup behavior: A meta-analysis. American Psychologist, 74, 569–586.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lejuez, C. W., Read, J. P., Kahler, C. W., et al. (2002). Evaluation of a behavioral measure of risk taking: The Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART). Journal of Experimental Psychology, 8, 75–84.Google ScholarPubMed
Logan, G. D. (1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95, 492–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matsumoto, D., Yoo, S. H., Hirayama, S., et al. (2005). Development and validation of a measure of display rule knowledge: The display rule assessment inventory. Emotion, 5, 23–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Merz, J. (1986). SAF: Fragebogen zur Messung von dispositioneller Selbstaufmerksamkeit [SAF: Scale for the assessment of dispositional self-consciousness]. Diagnostica, 32, 142–152.Google Scholar
Mischel, W. (Ed.). (1968). Personality and Assessment. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Mitchell, C. J., De Houwer, J., & Lovibond, P. F. (2009) The propositional nature of human associative learning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32,183–198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Newcomb, T. M. (1929). Consistency of Certain Extrovert-Introvert Behavior Patterns in 51 Problem Boys. New York, NY: Columbia University, Teachers College, Bureau of Publications.Google Scholar
Niedenthal, P. M., & Ric, F. (2017). Psychology of Emotion. New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nosek, B.A. (2005). Moderators of the relationships between implicit and explicit evaluation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 565–584.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nosek, B.A. (2007). Implicit-explicit relations. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 65–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ortner, T. M., & Proyer, R. T. (2015). Objective personality tests. In Ortner, T. M., & van de Vijver, F. J. R. (Eds.). Behavior Based Assessment: Going beyond Self Report in the Personality, Affective, Motivation, and Social Domains. Oxford: Hogrefe Publishing, pp. 133–149.Google Scholar
Ortner, T. M., & Schmitt, M. (2014). Advances and continuing challenges in objective personality testing. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 30, 163–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oswald, F. L., Mitchell, G., Blanton, H., et al. (2013). Predicting ethnic and racial discrimination: A meta-analysis of IAT criterion studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 171–192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Payne, B. K., Burkley, M. A., & Stokes, M. B. (2008). Why do implicit and explicit attitude tests diverge? The role of structural fit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 16–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pettigrew, T. F., & Meertens, R. W. (1995). Subtle and blatant prejudice in Western Europe. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 57–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petty, R., & Krosnick, J. A. (1995). Attitude Strength. Antecedents and Consequences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Pietschnig, J., Gittler, G., Stieger, S., et al. (2018). Indirect (implicit) and direct (explicit) self-esteem measures are virtually unrelated: A meta-analysis of the initial preference task. PLoS ONE 13 (9), e0202873. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0202873CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reich, R. R., Below, M. C., & Goldman, M. S. (2010). Explicit and implicit measures of expectancy and related alcohol cognitions: A meta-analytic comparison. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 24, 13–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rinn, W. E. (1984). The neuropsychology of facial expression: A review of the neurological and psychological mechanisms for producing facial expressions. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 52–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ross, E. D., Gupta, S. S., Adnan, A. M., et al. (2016). Neurophysiology of spontaneous facial expressions: I Motor control of the upper and lower face is behaviorally independent in adults. Cortex, 76, 28–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ross, E. D., Gupta, S. S., Adnan, A. M., et al. (2019). Neurophysiology of spontaneous facial expressions: II Motor control of the right and left face is partially independent in adults. Cortex, 111, 164–182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ross, E. D., & Pulusu, V. K. (2013). Posed versus spontaneous facial expressions are modulated by opposite cerebral hemispheres. Cortex, 49, 1280–1291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmidt, A. F. (2009). Fragebogen zu selbststeuernden Kompetenzen (FSSTK) [Questionnaire of self-regulative competencies]. Bonn: University of Bonn (unpublished manuscript).Google Scholar
Schmitt, M. (1990). Konsistenz als Persönlichkeitseigenschaft? Moderatorvariablen in der Persönlichkeits- und Einstellungsforschung [Consistency as a personality trait? Moderators in personality and attitude research]. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Schmitt, M. (2006). Conceptual, theoretical, and historical foundations of multimethod assessment. In Eid, M., & Diener, E. (Eds.), Handbook of Multimethod Measurement in Psychology. New York, NY: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Schmitt, M. (2009). Person x situation - interactions as moderators. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, M., & Borkenau, P. (1992). The consistency of personality. In Caprara, G.-V., & Van Heck, G.L. (Eds.), Modern Personality Psychology. Critical Reviews and New Directions. New York, NY: Harvester-Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
Schröder-Abé, M., Rudolph, A., & Schütz, A. (2007a). High implicit self-esteem is not necessarily advantageous: Discrepancies between implicit and explicit self-esteem and their relationship with anger expression and psychological health. European Journal of Personality, 21, 319–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schröder-Abé, M., Rudolph, A., Wiesner, A., et al. (2007b). Self-esteem discrepancies and defensive reactions to social feedback. International Journal of Psychology, 42, 174–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherman, J. W., Klauer, C. K., & Allen, T. J. (2010). Mathematical modeling of implicit social cognition. In Handbook of Implicit Social Cognition: Measurement, Theory, and Applications. New York, NY: Guilford Press, pp. 156–175.Google Scholar
Smith, E. C., & DeCoster, J. (2000). Dual-process models in social and cognitive psychology: Conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 108–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, M. (1974). The self-monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 526–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, M., & Gangestad, S. (2000). Self-monitoring: Appraisal and reappraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 530–555.Google Scholar
Snyder, M., & Ickes, W. (1985). Personality and social behavior. In Lindzey, G., & Aronson, E. (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology (3rd ed., vol. II, pp. 883–947). New York, NY: Random House.Google Scholar
Stöber, J. (1999). Die Soziale-Erwuünschtheits-Skala-17 (SES-17): Entwicklung und erste Befunde zu Reliabilität und Validität [The Social Desirability scale (SES-17): Scale development and initial findings on reliability and validity]. Diagnostica, 45, 173–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strack, F., & Deutsch, R. (2004). Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 220–247.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swann, W. B., & Seyle, C. (2005). Personality Psychology’s comeback and its emerging symbiosis with social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 155–165.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tassinary, L. G., Cacioppo, J. T., & Vanman, E. J. (2007). The skeletomotor system: Surface electromyography. In Cacioppo, J., Tassinary, L., & Berntson, G. (Eds.), Handbook of Psychophysiology (3rd ed., pp. 267–299). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, D. M., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1994). Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1049–1062.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, T., Lindsey, S., & Schooler, T. Y. (2000). A model of dual attitudes. Psychological Review, 107, 101–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wittenbrink, B., Judd, C. M., & Park, B. (2001). Spontaneous prejudice at the implicit level and its relationship between questionnaire measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 262–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zinkernagel, A., Hofmann, W., Dislich, F. X. R., et al. (2011). Indirect assessment of implicit disgust sensitivity. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 27, 237–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zinkernagel, A., Hofmann, W., Gerstenberg, F. X. R., et al. (2013). The road to the unconscious self taken: Understanding when people gain self-knowledge of implicit dispositions from behavioral cues. European Journal of Personality, 27, 355–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zinkernagel, A., Alexandrowicz, R. W., Lischetzke, T., et al. (2019). The BlenderFace Method: Video-based measurement of raw movement data during facial expressions of emotion using open-source software. Behavior Research Methods, 51, 747–768.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×